1. Field of Invention
This invention relates to a human machine interface and, more particularly, to a computer mouse type device for entering data to a computer, video game, or similar machine.
2. Description of Prior Art
It is known in the field of computers to utilize remote computer interface devices that are hand-operated and used in conjunction with the keyboard. A well-known computer interface device is commonly known as the computer mouse, wherein the mouse is moved by hand over a planar work surface to move the cursor on the computer monitor. The mouse also typically includes an electrical switch that can be activated when the cursor is in a desired location in order to cause an entry to the computer.
A problem with the mouse-type devices is that the mouse is used in connection with a keyboard for data input. As a result, the user must repeatedly move his or her hand between the keyboard and the computer mouse work surface. This hand movement required for the operation of the computer mouse is both inefficient and tiring to the user. Therefore, a need exists for a mouse-type computer interface device that does not require the user to move his or her hand from the keyboard to a remote location in order to enter mouse-type data into the computer. Additionally this device must not interfere with keyboard use, or the use of other standard office equipment.
Another problem with mouse-type devices is associated in their use with laptop computers. The environment in which a laptop computer is used will typically eliminate planar surfaces as required by the typical computer mouse. Similarly, wireless computer keyboards have been recently introduced to the market place. However the user cannot fully utilize the remote capabilities of these wireless keyboards because the user must be near a planar surface in order to use a tabletop mouse. Therefore, a need exists for a mouse-type computer interface device that does not require a planar surface to operate the mouse.
Many alternatives exist for the computer mouse. It will be seen however that most computer mouse alternatives suffer from at lease one of three major problems in the industry. The first major problem in the industry relates to developing new hand-eye-coordination skills. For example, conventional computer mouse users have developed their hand-eye-coordination skills to manipulate a mouse curser through a single sensor (i.e. a track-ball, mouse-stick, optical sensor, touch-pad, etcetera.). However many computer mouse alternatives require multiple sensors for mouse cursor control, and hence require multiple body parts to manipulate those sensors. Moving these multiple body parts (hands, fingers, wrist, etcetera) in a coordinated effort requires an entirely new hand-eye-coordination skill set. Therefore a need exists for a mouse alternative that does not require a new hand-eye-coordination skill set.
The second major problem in the industry is related to accidental sensor activation (accidental data entry). Most computer mouse alternatives are prone to accidental sensor activation in one way or another. This includes accidental sensor activation caused by movements of the human hand, and accidental sensor activation caused by touching or holding things with the human hand. For example, virtual reality type gloves detect hand motions, and will move the mouse cursor and enter commands by any movement of the hands, fingers, or wrist. This is a particular issue when moving the wrist and fingers to type on a keyboard. Other alternatives locate the sensors on parts of the hand that subject them to accidental activation when holding a glass, writing with a pen, typing on a keyboard, or performing other standard operations. Still other solutions separate the mouse cursor movement function from the mouse “click” function to such an extreme that once the desired cursor position is obtained, the user must then reposition the hand (and hence loose the desired cursor position) in order to activate the mouse “click” feature. Therefore the use of such devices brings practical computer operation to a standstill. Here too a need exists for a mouse alternative that avoids accidental sensor activation.
The third major problem in the industry is related to the tactile and gripping ability of the human hand. As will be seen, many virtual reality glove type devices cover the finger-pads of the human hand. In other words; devices that locate sensors in the fingertip area also cover the finger-pads. In doing so the user is left without the tactile touch senses and gripping surfaces of the fingertips. This is particularly important when considering the registration “bumps” on the “F”, “J”, and “5” keys of a computer keyboard. Therefore a need exists for a mouse alternative that leaves the finger-pads exposed when locating sensors in the fingertip area.
For example, U.S. Pat. No. 4,414,537 (Grimes) describes a glove equipped with sensors for detecting sign-language character type hand movements. This invention requires the user to be fluent in Single Hand Manual Alphabet for the American Deaf. Although unique, this invention is expensive to manufacture with its many sensors. It should also be noted that the “F”, “J”, and “5” keys on a computer keyboard have special Braille type bumps that are sensed by the user's fingertips to properly locate the hands and fingers on the keyboard. This invention violated that ability by covering the fingertips. Therefore this invention would make it difficult for an operator to type. Additionally, it would be very difficult for the user to write with a pen, or answer the phone without accidentally entering data. Lastly, this invention is not well suited to generate mouse-type cursor data.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,988,981 (Zimmerman, et al) describes a glove-type device used to manipulate virtual computer objects. The glove has several sensors and ultrasonic transmitters, and the computer monitor has several ultrasonic receivers. The sensors are used to determine hand manipulation and the ultrasonic transmitters and receivers are used to determine relative hand position. This invention is well suited to determine virtual three-dimensional positioning, and the manipulation of virtual computer objects. However the many sensors and ultrasonic transmitters and receivers make the device complicated and expensive. Additionally, as compared to a conventional computer mouse, the device requires excessive computer processing to manipulate the virtual objects. The invention also conceals the tips of the fingers whereby the user looses tactile senses as needed for keyboard operation. Lastly, it would be very difficult for the user to operate the keyboard, write with a pen, or answer the phone without accidentally entering data.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,489,922 (Zloof) utilizes two concentric rings placed on the index finger of each hand. The user spins the ring on the right hand for vertical cursor movement, and the ring on the left hand for horizontal cursor movement. Further, each ring can be depressed to activate a switch so as to simulate a typical mouse button. Although a novel invention, this device requires the user to learn a whole new set of hand-eye coordination skills. This is because the horizontal and vertical cursor movements originate from two different sensors, and hence requires two different and independent body functions. Even more, the user must combine these two new hand-eye coordination skill sets in order to have fluid cursor movement. This in itself is yet another hand-eye coordination skill that must be mastered by the user. Additionally the cost and labor to manufacture a device that requires two sensors for a cursor movement is more costly than a device that only requires one. The device is also very mechanical in nature and is subject failure and repeated maintenance. Further, this invention is intended for use by persons who have two hands. Therefore a disabled or handicapped person having only one hand or missing fingers would have difficulty in using these devices. Lastly, it would be very difficult for the user to operate the keyboard or answer the phone without accidentally entering data.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,444,462 (Wambach), and U.S. Pat. No. 6,097,369 (Wambach) both describe a glove type device that has various sensors mounted on it. Vertical cursor movement is obtained by moving the index finger up and down, and horizontal cursor movement is obtained by rotating the wrist left or right. Although novel inventions, these devices require the user to learn a whole new set of hand-eye coordination skills. This is because the horizontal and vertical cursor movements originate from two different sensors, and hence requires the user to manipulate two different body-parts. This requires the user to learn and develop two new, different, and independent hand-eye coordination skills. Even more, the user must combine these two skills together in order to have fluid cursor movement. This in itself is yet another new hand-eye coordination skill that must be mastered by the user. Additionally the cost and labor to manufacture a device that requires two sensors for cursor movement is more costly than a device that only requires one sensor. Having the sensors mounted in a glove-type fashion also presents a problem, as the glove cannot be conveniently attached or removed. This makes it more difficult to use the bathroom, wash hands, etcetera. Finally, it would be nearly impossible to use the computer keyboard or perform other standard office functions without accidentally activating the sensors on these devices. Therefore these units must be disabled or entirely removed when the user does not wish to generate mouse commands.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,526,669 B2 (Nagata), describes a hand-mounted device used to acquire finger manipulation data. The data obtained from this device is used to analyze human finger movements in order to better understand and operate robot hands. Although an interesting invention, this device interferes with computer keyboard entry by requiring the user to wear a sensor cap on each fingertip. This cap blocks the sensory tactile touch as needed by the user for keyboard operation. Additionally the sensors used in the device are expensive, bulky, cannot be easily attached or removed, and are not well suited for mouse equivalent data.
U.S. Pat. No. 6,154,199 (Butler), describes a glove-type device that has a track-ball mounted on the side of the index finger, and buttons mounted on the palm of the hand. Cursor movement is obtained by manipulating the track-ball with the thumb, and button activation by pushing the palm-mounted buttons with the fingers. Although an interesting invention, this device has several limitations as follows:                1. The user must make a conscience effort to not accidentally strike a computer keyboard key while sweeping the fingers around to press the palm-mounted buttons. In other words, when transitioning from keyboard entry to palm-button activation, the invention requires the user to elevate his or her hand away from the keyboard in order to avoid accidentally striking a keyboard key.        2. The invention is limited to a track-ball sensor for cursor movement and does not consider other sensor types such as a mouse-stick, optical sensor, scroll-wheels, etcetera.        3. The user must use two different fingers to execute the computer “drag-and-drop” command. This is because one finger must be activating one of the palm-mounted buttons, while the thumb simultaneously activates the track-ball.        4. The palm-mounted buttons will be accidentally activated when performing standard tasks such as holding a drinking glass, answering the phone, shaking hands, pushing against the armrests of a chair while standing up, etcetera.        5. The invention fails to utilize a convenient means to turn the unit on or off.        6. The invention does not consider mounting sensors on the thumb or other fingers of the hand.        7. The glove type device cannot be quickly and conveniently attached or removed. This makes it more difficult to wash hands, shake hands, use the bathroom, or perform other hygiene functions.        8. The invention would require periodic sterilizing and cleaning similar to that of an article of clothing. This would be especially necessary in the event that multiple operators were using the same device.        
U.S. Pat. No. 5,581,484 (Prince), describes a glove type device with sensors mounted on the fingertips. This device is attached to a computer which interprets relative finger positions as the fingers are moved and pressed against a flat surface such as a tabletop. The manner in which each sensor reacts during each virtual keystroke allows the computer to predict what key the user intends to depress. This allows the user to incorporate any flat surface as a virtual keyboard. Although a novel invention for keyboard entry, this device is not well suited to generate mouse equivalent data. The many sensors are also expensive and would be accidentally activated when using the computer mouse, answering the phone, etcetera. Lastly, this glove type device cannot be easily attached or removed.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,638,092 (Eng, et al), describes a ring type device that is mounted on the finger of a computer user. The ring transmits a signal that is received by multiple receivers imbedded in the computer keyboard. The receivers determine cursor movement as the ring is moved up, down, and across the keyboard. A special button is mounted adjacent to the keyboard space bar to accommodate the mouse “click” button feature. Although an interesting invention, this device requires specialized computer keyboards with multiple receivers. These keyboards would be expensive and would make it difficult to use the ring device with existing computers without also replacing the keyboard. This device also requires the user to remove the ring-hand from the keyboard position, and then move it according to desired cursor direction. Then the user must reposition the ring-hand on the keyboard. This tedious back and forth procedure requires the user to abandon their keyboard hand position just to try and find it again. This device has also divided the hardware and operator means of generating mouse equivalent data. Cursor position is generated by moving the ring, but the mouse “click” button is placed on the keyboard. This prevents the user from generating mouse equivalent data within the confines of a single hand. This leads to the ultimate shortcoming of the device. This shortcoming is due to the fact that once the user locates the ring for desired cursor position; the user must then move the hand (ring) back to the keyboard “click” button in order to activate the mouse command. In doing so, the user looses the desired cursor position. Therefore the user is unable to simultaneously position the curser and click the keyboard mouse button with a single hand. Hence the device is unable to function as a computer mouse replacement. Additionally, the user's hand must never leave the proximity of the receivers in the computer keyboard as this would render the device unusable. Therefore the user is always tethered to the computer keyboard. Lastly, the cursor will be moving across the screen in an uncontrolled manner as the user types on the keyboard. This will be an obvious annoyance the user.
Pub. No.: US 2004/0012564 A1 (Zngf, et al), describes a virtual reality glove type device that has a tilt sensor mounted on the back of the hand, and bending sensors mounted on each finger of the glove. As the user rotates their wrist between 0–180 degrees, the tilt sensor changes the corresponding roll-angle of the on-screen cursor. Once the desired angle of travel is obtained, the user then moves the thumb toward the index finger in order to move the cursor from left-to-right along the angular line of travel. Likewise the user moves the index finger toward the thumb to move the cursor from right-to-left along the line of travel. Once the cursor is at the desired location, the user then activates the mouse “click” button by bending either the middle, ring, or little finger. Although unique, this device has several limitations as follows:                a) The device requires the user to learn a whole new hand-eye-coordination skill set. This is due to the fact that cursor movement is obtained from three different sensors instead of just one. Hence, three different body elements (wrist, thumb, index-finger) are required to move the cursor instead of just one body element. This puts the invention at a disadvantage when compared to devices that obtain cursor movement from a single sensor.        b) The device cannot be used when performing any other function such as typing on the keyboard. This is due to the fact that as the user types (or performs other functions), the mouse cursor will be moving across the computer screen in an uncontrolled manner. Adding simultaneous “mouse-click” activation from the middle, ring, and little finger will bring complete mayhem to the computer environment.        c) The cost and labor to manufacture a device that requires three sensors for cursor movement is more costly than a device that only requires one sensor.        d) The device is not designed for universal right or left hand operation. This is due to the fact that when the device is moved from the right hand to the left, all of the sensors will function in the opposite direction. This would be a particular problem for ambidextrous users. This problem would require expensive bi-directional sensors, and/or a separate device program for left handed users. Additionally, using the device on the left hand places the sensors on the wrong side of the glove. This may interfere with other work functions.        e) The device fails to utilize a convenient means to turn the unit on or off.        f) The glove type device cannot be quickly and conveniently attached or removed. This makes it more difficult to wash hands, shake hands, use the bathroom, or perform other hygiene functions.        g) The device would require periodic sterilizing and cleaning similar to that of an article of clothing. This would be especially necessary in the event that multiple operators were sharing the same device.        h) The device requires the user to rotate the wrist between 0–180 degrees. This is a difficult task to perform and could eventually lead to a repetitive-stress injury.        i) The device fails to utilize wireless communications whereby the user would not be tethered to the computer.        j) The device requires the use of all the fingers of the human hand, and therefore cannot be used by handicapped persons who are missing one or more fingers.        
U.S. Pat. No. 6,049,327 (Walker, et al), describes a virtual reality glove type device that is used to control computer animations. The glove contains a hand shaped circuit board that is placed on the backside of the hand. This flexible circuit board has a special characteristic in that it can detect flexation. In doing so the device can detect finger and thumb movements. Hand gestures are thereby converted to computer commands for controlling computer-based animations. Although a unique invention, the device is not well suited for mouse equivalent computer commands. This is due to the fact that the unit fails to include a mouse “click” button. Additionally, the device cannot be used when performing other functions such as typing on the keyboard. This is due to the fact that as the user types, the mouse cursor will be moving across the computer screen in an uncontrolled manner.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,999,166 (Rangan), describes a three-dimensional positioning device that utilizes optical electronics. The device consists of a tabletop enclosure that has a light source and a light detector. The user wears a ring type reflector that positions a small mirror on the underside of the hand. Light is then shone upward from the tabletop unit to the mirrored reflector under the hand. The user then moves the hand (reflector) over the device to reflect the light source to specific locations on the light detector. Reflecting light on different areas of the light detector results in a corresponding two-dimensional mapping, or cursor positioning, on the computer screen. Third-dimensional command data (if needed) is obtained by raising the reflector and hence lowering the intensity of reflected light on the light detector. Once the cursor is in the desired location, the user then depresses one of the buttons located on the front (finger) side of the tabletop unit. Although an interesting invention, the device would be difficult to use in place of a computer mouse. This shortcoming is due to the fact that once the user locates the reflector ring for desired cursor position; the user must then move the hand (ring) back to a location where the buttons can be depressed. In doing so, the user looses the desired cursor position. This problem is further magnified when the reflective ring is worn on the same finger that will be moving downward to depress the mouse button. Therefore the user is unable to simultaneously position the curser and click the mouse button. Hence the device does not function as a computer mouse replacement. Additionally, the user's hand must never leave the proximity of the tabletop unit, as this would render the device unusable. Therefore the user is always tethered to the computer desk.
The Rocket Mouse (by ErgoTouch) is another computer mouse type device. This unit has a track-ball and mouse buttons mounted in a hand-held package. The user holds the device between the index finger and the thumb. Activation of the track-ball and mouse buttons is by way of the thumb. Although an exiting invention, this device requires the user to hold onto it. Therefore the unit must be put down in order to use the keyboard, answer the phone, write with a pen, etceteras.
Another application for data entry devices is for video and computer games. These devices, called “controllers”, are well known and typically involves some kind of hand held joystick with multiple buttons, ray guns, race car steering wheels, and so on. Like a computer mouse, most of these devices require the user to hold onto them. Therefore the user must put the device down in order to use a second data input device, answer the phone, etcetera. Additionally, devices such as a steering wheel and foot pedals are stationary and do not provide users the freedom to move about. Therefore, a need exists for a portable device that does not require the user to hold onto it, and one which doesn't interfere with other activities such as using a second data input device or answering the phone. Further, video and computer game operators enjoy the feeling of becoming engrossed in the game by having a data input device attached to their body in some manner. Therefore a need exists for a device that can be easily attached and removed from the user's body.
Virtual reality has also recently gained much interest in the video and computer game industry. However, these devices typically rely on expensive transmitters and receivers to obtain relative positioning. They are also typically arranged in a glove type fashion that blocks the users tactile senses, and makes attachment and removal of the device more cumbersome. These devices also make it difficult to perform other tasks such as answering the phone or using the computer keyboard without accidentally entering a command. Lastly, these devices are not well suited for other uses such as generating mouse equivalent data
One such example is U.S. Pat. No. 6,540,607 B2 (Mokris, et al), describes a video or computer game device that detects the location and orientation of a pointing device or gun. This is accomplished by mounting infrared transmitters on the gun, and infrared receivers on the video or computer display. The receivers determine the relative signal delay between the various transmitters to determine position and orientation. This device is well suited for video game applications that require a point and shoot type of user interface. However it requires the user to hold onto the pointing device. Therefore the user must put the device down in order to perform other tasks such as answering the phone, drinking from a glass, using a second data input device, etcetera. Also, the transmitters must be spaced a significant distance from each other in order to obtain proper resolution for position and orientation. This makes for a bulky and awkward user interface. These transmitters and receivers are also expensive and add to the complexity of the device. Additionally, video and computer game operators enjoy the feeling of becoming engrossed in the game by having a data input device attached to their body in some fashion. This device fails to do so. Lastly, the device is not well suited to generate computer mouse equivalent data, should it be used in that capacity.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,488,362 (Ullman, et al), describes a glove type device that is used in place of a hand held joystick. The connection of different exposed electrical contacts on the glove represent corresponding joystick type functions such as up-down, left-right, and weapons fire. Joystick type functions are accomplished by moving the wrist in various directions, and push-button type functions are obtained by contacting one or more fingers to the thumb. Although an interesting transformation of a joystick, this device is nothing more than a series of electrical contacts mounted on a glove. Therefore, this device fails to take advantage of more sophisticated sensors such as a track-ball, mouse-stick, scroll-wheel, or even a hand mounted mini joystick. Also, the device completely covers the hand and therefore blocks the tactile senses. Further, the device can be easily short-circuited as the electrical contacts of the device are exposed. This would preclude drinking from a metal cup, or resting the hand on a metal object. Lastly, the glove cannot be quickly and easily attached or removed from the hand.